Post: #1

From reading here it seems like this year has been a banner year in The West for the decline of male SMV.

This year I tried Tinder in several countries, notably Russia. Lots of good matches. 8s, 18 years olds, girls that message first. And that was with them thinking I was Russian. Even in Armenia and Georgia it wasn't too bad even though hardly anyone uses it there. When I got back, pestilence.

Will male SMV crash in the developing world in the near future? I don't think so, Thailand has had odd blokes popping over for decades and it's not killed it.

The reason I think it's declined so much in The West is that all of the above have been combined, whereas in Russia, the country with the highest percentage of female business leaders, the SMV hasn't bottomed for men. They haven't had that full spectrum that we've had in the waste. And when it comes to women in Russia, they have to earn their way in business. They don't have soyboy politicians and corporations re-engineering society for their sole benefit.

Post: #2

I would say the biggest thing is increased pressure and acceptance by women that they must have a career and put off getting married and having kids or not have these things at all. With women making their own money and government programs that provide welfare in case they get pregnant or struggle, the value of men is diminished as women don't see the need in finding a successful man who can take care of them especially in their 20s like in the past. It doesn't help that this message is reinforced by older generations of women, schools, television, movies, etc. that continue to act as if women have been oppressed by men.

Men are increasingly becoming a commodity that is little different from the next man in the eyes of women. Then, many of these women then go on to choose men for relationships who are supportive of these non-traditional choices: not having kids or putting them off, not getting married, accept me for being fat, tons of tattoos, weird hair color or just not acting feminine, etc. In short, we have created societies where women no longer value the best that men can offer.

Post: #3

Your post is hard to understand. What does female behavior have to do with male SMV?

You saying that a man’s SMV is affected by women? The only thing a man’s SMV is affected by is himself, IMO.

Unless you’re talking about man’s inherent value to women?

Post: #4

(11-07-2018 01:12 PM)gework Wrote:  From reading here it seems like this year has been a banner year in The West for the decline of male SMV.

You could have made this post every year since the inception of this forum.

Every year, there's a select group of guys that will whine to no end about how the sky is falling.

Yet if you think about it logically, "the decline of male SMV" makes no logical sense.

Until women figure out a way to reproduce by themselves, male sexual market value will remain constant. It is not in decline.

What I think the old heads are complaining about is that male SMV is changing and they are feeling left out. Gone are the strong alpha males, the Paul Newmans and Marlon Brandos of yesteryear. , they lament.

But so it goes. Values do not decline, they change. In the age of social media, Fame is now more important than Game. And some guys will cling to their old beliefs until they finally figure that out.

Post: #5

Very true. Fame was always more important though.

Even in the 1940s.

Post: #6

I voted "Girls overestimating their SMV due to apps/online" and i will briefly give an example of why.

Spoke to a girl about this earlier this week. She told me she isn't really looking for anything on tinder, she's just there to explore the options, but so far nothing special (which translates to: if i meet chad or a 9/10 fitness model i might go out on a date with him). Saying this while looking at her match count, she had well over 1200 matches and 43 new messages.

Girls are on there for validation nowadays, inflate their egos whether it's intentional or unintentional just getting a dopamine rush whenever a guy seems to throw attention their way. I haven't been on tinder for well over a year but decided to make a profile to quickly see what's up, explore the pool. A high % of girls are having these in their bio now. They stood out to me.

1) "Hit me up with your best pickup line"
2) "if you can make me laugh, you've got my attention"
3) "entertain me and you can have me if you're lucky"

like they are some sort of queen that will make a peasants day by giving him attention for 10 minutes. This is so messed up. I instantly regret getting back on and deleted that shitty app, back to real life approaches.

Take a look at what i found during my one day experiment on tinder, i couldn't handle this fake shit anymore but this is what i screenshot before i deleted the app. (private information censored with red)



Which translates to:

"Move on fuckboi, you nasty.

Whatever.
I only like if you superlike me, so like normally and you're deleted without hesitation and you'll be made fool of.
You have 1 hour before i lose my patience.

Feminist since the day i was born.

-Independent, Dirty Handy Materials, IG to get.
-Drink or have skanks in your pictures or in your life and it's byebye, you're not worth it.
-Demisexual, can't physically get turned on by someone i don't love."

You know what's the saddest thing about all of this? This girl is probably getting more matches than the above average guy out there trying to improve his SMV.

And she's a 5/10 at best, with tattoos, blue hair and piercings. What a fucking time we live in. I am so fed up with these below average girls thinking they are of high value, i see it spreading like wildfire nowadays. Do you just ignore all of this happening or is there a way we can stop it altogether?

Social media for girls is the same as porn for guys. And dating apps for girls is the same as fapping for guys. It's mental masturbation for them. They NEED their quick fix.

Post: #7

(11-07-2018 01:48 PM)corsega Wrote:  

(11-07-2018 01:12 PM)gework Wrote:  From reading here it seems like this year has been a banner year in The West for the decline of male SMV.

Until women figure out a way to reproduce by themselves, male sexual market value will remain constant. It is not in decline.

Women can already do ivf and even outsource their womb duties with surrogacy. The only reason they would need a man is more resources (to live a middle class lifestyle, not to survive) and social approval. As far as fucking goes, I'm sure getting fucked by a real (attractive) man is preferable to a dildo/fuck machine, which is what I assume you meant.

Post: #8

It's nothing to get upset about. Merely the iron law of supply and demand.

The intense, overwhelming demand for sex by men is far greater than the demand by women for the same. It's always been this way surely.

It's just the way it is. Why get upset about it?

Post: #9

Male SMV "rising" isn't a problem because competition is great and leads to progress.

However female SMV is declining. As in due to feminism, social media, etc etc the WB-WNB or 1-10 scale has kinda shifted. Women who were 3's are moved up to be 5's and so on.

People on this forum might not see this because they're established, but the perfect proof is fat acceptance.

Instagram @iska (I believe) started out as a sorta thicker white woman who got thousands of followers due to her ass. NOW she's huge and still gaining thousands of followers. 10 years ago she would have been seen as disgusting.

Post: #10

I miss Tinder from 2013/2014. Those were some good times.

Post: #11

I think it is a combination of things:

1. Lack of strong father figures that encourage kind, sweet, feminine daughters. Too many absent dads, abusive dads or soyboi dads. None of these give a young girl the formation she needs to be a well-adjusted young woman.

2. Too much crappy food, combined with too many women taking legal and illegal drugs has really screwed with their bodies. SSRI's, birth control pills, and crappy food has made women in many parts of the West fat and sick. They feel as miserable as they look, and treat men accordingly.

3. Cultural Marxism and the constant anti-male fear-mongering has had an effect on many Western women. They are scared that according to feminists, there are tons of men going out there and raping girls left and right with no consequences. The "high education" system teaches them as much for four years, and how do you think they can relate to men after they are done with the brainwashing?

4. Online dating has screwed up the market like crazy. Tons of offers of cock (but no commitment) of higher-end alphas that blow middling and lower SMV womens' expectations up to be sky high. They can get plenty of sex, but the fuckboys aren't sticking around, hence the redirection of hate towards the beta male types that are their natural pairing.

5. Smartphone addiction outside of dating apps is making many women in the West socially retarded. There are few women who can actually put their phone down for an extended period of time and have true intimacy with a friend, much less a man.

6. Mass immigration from foreign countries, the majority of which has been male imports. You skew the market with too much cock, and women become scared/entitled when they are hit on constantly, especially if it is the IRT's or similar unwelcome advances.

Bottom line is, online dating is a near complete waste of time in the West if you're looking for a LTR/marriage. The best girls for serious relationships will only be found through social circle, church, etc. I think the only viable places you will find where online dating makes sense for a man trying to find a quality woman is where the woman in question has fairly low-quality guys to chose from in her own dating market. She feels lucky if you best the SMV/MMV of her local men, and works hard to gain your attention and commitment. I'm amazed on VietnamCupid, for instance, how many girls state they want marriage in their profile.

I don't recall EVER seeing an American woman, even if she is late 20's or 30's put that in her profile. It is amazing to me that even if they want marriage, they won't say it, because they want to be "independent" or something. Bottom-line is, get off the online dating scene if you're in the West and build a better social circle, or use online dating in the developing world to find a sweeter version of the woman you want who is looking for a quality man, and be that man of quality. That is all.

Post: #12

I think the question is not well framed. Consider an analogy with dowry. In certain countries (India), women (or her family) must pay the husband to get married. In other countries (Islamic), the husband pays money to the bride family. Marriage brings value to both participants, but depending on the culture either men or women must pay the cost of the deal.

Using that analogy we see that on certain sex markets, men must pay (in money or in time and effort) a certain amount to get pussy. Call that the cost of pussy. That amount depends on the market and varies with time. In a market where men are very horny/desperate and women very prudish, we expect the cost of sex to be very high (or in OP’s terms, the SMV of men to be very low). Conversely, in a market where women are ugly and easy like the West now, we would expect the cost of pussy to be very low or negative, but that is not the case. Cost of pussy seems to have increased. This is a paradox.

To solve this paradox we must see that the market is not a market for just resource (time/money) vs pussy. It is a market where commitment + resource are exchanged for pussy. Commitment from men has decreased to zero, so men must compensate with increased resource payment. If you ignore the commitment variable, you think that cost of pussy has increased, but it has not, because commitment has gone to zero.

Now what would happen if a man was willing to pay in commitment? It wouldn’t work because commitment is non enforceable! (Because of divorce and general promiscuity) So women value commitment rationally at zero. (Similar effect to Akerlof lemon model in microeconomy).

Hence my answer, market cost of pussy has increased (in apparence) because commitment from men is valued at zero due to promiscuity and destruction of marriage.

Note that cost of prostitution has *not* increased (they have gone down slightly according to the Economist magazine), which is consistent with my thesis. Because cost of prostitution has never included any commitment component.

Post: #13

"Conversely, in a market where women are ugly and easy like the West now, we would expect the cost of pussy to be very low or negative, but that is not the case. Cost of pussy seems to have increased. This is a paradox."

Let me solve it for you: The demand for pussy by men is huge.

Done. Not such a paradox.

Post: #14

^^^^
The demand for pussy is huge, yes, but I’m not aware that it has changed in recent years. So that can’t be the reason for the perceived increase in cost of pussy.

Post: #15

They're all fat

Post: #16

Cost of pussy is increasing and pussy quality is declining. Women are responding rationally to the impossibility of obtaining commitment on the sex market by raising prices and lowering quality.

Post: #17

Or maybe it has to do with the increased availability of men on social media? Greater perceived demand = higher price.

Post: #18

Indubitably it all has to do with traditions and demographics , and "women's rights"
Women should marry earlier and make more kids , spend less and work less. Spend more time for their men and their kids. Just with this , society would be better off.

Post: #19

The problem with Sexual Market Places and the values that it allocates to people, is that the bottom 80% of heterosexual men are in the lowest class. Therefore a gulf between them and the women they used to marry young has formed. In this gulf, there are homosexuals, lesbians, alpha heterosexual men and now invented genders.

The bottom 80% of men are the only sexual class which has been disempowered by Western states and the CEOs who hated the married man premium added to men’s salaries.

The same woman who would condemn an incel for entitlement would march in the streets to support the plight of homosexuals.

Post: #20

((()))

Post: #21

Welfare.

Without the need for a stable, caring, decent provider due to welfare, women turn to hedonistic actualisation of their hypergamy and slut around with bad boys and alphas.

ie Good men have no value to them. as commitment free cock can be had effortlessly.

Post: #22

(11-07-2018 02:10 PM)Donfitz007 Wrote:  Male SMV "rising" isn't a problem because competition is great and leads to progress.

However female SMV is declining. As in due to feminism, social media, etc etc the WB-WNB or 1-10 scale has kinda shifted. Women who were 3's are moved up to be 5's and so on.

People on this forum might not see this because they're established, but the perfect proof is fat acceptance.

Instagram @iska (I believe) started out as a sorta thicker white woman who got thousands of followers due to her ass. NOW she's huge and still gaining thousands of followers. 10 years ago she would have been seen as disgusting.

You're on to something. Reminds me of a great post by skank hunt that put this into perspective. It's mindblowing, fat acceptance for women is a thing now while the pressure and image for guys have blown up over any normal expectations in the past century (the birth of instagram/popularity of dating apps). You can look like a landwhale and pull in huge number of followers while on the other spectrum you'll need to have that Hollywood body, fitness model body, or something up that scale to compete and be on top of the ladder in terms of visual looks, on tinder and other dating apps.

(09-08-2018 12:47 PM)Skank_Hunt Wrote:  I would add that these in shape guys are becoming so common now that it is nowhere near as impactful as it once was. A lot of these guys are on steroids, sacrificing their long-term health and a hell of a lot of time, effort, money and freedom whether in the gym or cooking/eating food or drinking thick protein shakes, getting generic sleeve tattoos to look more "alpha", most of this to be able to reach the basic minimum to bang a 5 or 6 on tinder. I know some of these guys and there's a fine line between "willing to put in the effort" and "being an idiot".

15 years ago I was in hospital and was by no means huge, I just had low bodyfat and I lifted, so I had more of a male model look with a well defined chest. Back and shoulders were there but if I had my clothes on, especially baggy clothes, you could easily have mistaken me for being skinny or average. In hospital I was hooked up to so many monitors that it required me to wear no shirt. At first I thought I was imagining it but the young nurses would walk in the ward and steal glances at me then look down embarrassed before continuing. A hot nurse was standing my my bed and pressing her thighs into mine when she absolutely had no need to do so (nothing to reach). Then when she left she ran her hand down my thigh. I was quite sick at the time, nowhere near optimally fit, and it was as if these girls had never seen muscles before.

Today by comparison two things have changed: 1. female availability and thirst has declined massively; and 2. muscle bound gorillas are quite common, such that I look like a stick in comparison. I'm an ectomorph so it's impossible for me to get up to the mass that a lot of the men are at, especially when half of them use steroids or growth hormones. So as far as "putting in the work", there is nothing I can do about the above two factors. I or any other guy can optimize his body but he's nothing particularly special even if he ends up very respectably ripped.

Before the whole internet 2.0, in any social circle I was in, I knew which girls were "looking" for a BF. I mean, there was actual tangible thirst and discomfort from the girl, that she was single. It wasn't just about sex, it was about the inability to be alone, and the need for emotional intimacy, the protection of a man. Nowadays women don't really feel that anymore, they get it from their phones.

Post: #23

(11-07-2018 02:20 PM)Montrose Wrote:  I think the question is not well framed. Consider an analogy with dowry. In certain countries (India), women (or her family) must pay the husband to get married. In other countries (Islamic), the husband pays money to the bride family. Marriage brings value to both participants, but depending on the culture either men or women must pay the cost of the deal.

Using that analogy we see that on certain sex markets, men must pay (in money or in time and effort) a certain amount to get pussy. Call that the cost of pussy. That amount depends on the market and varies with time. In a market where men are very horny/desperate and women very prudish, we expect the cost of sex to be very high (or in OP’s terms, the SMV of men to be very low). Conversely, in a market where women are ugly and easy like the West now, we would expect the cost of pussy to be very low or negative, but that is not the case. Cost of pussy seems to have increased. This is a paradox.

To solve this paradox we must see that the market is not a market for just resource (time/money) vs pussy. It is a market where commitment + resource are exchanged for pussy. Commitment from men has decreased to zero, so men must compensate with increased resource payment. If you ignore the commitment variable, you think that cost of pussy has increased, but it has not, because commitment has gone to zero.

Now what would happen if a man was willing to pay in commitment? It wouldn’t work because commitment is non enforceable! (Because of divorce and general promiscuity) So women value commitment rationally at zero. (Similar effect to Akerlof lemon model in microeconomy).

Hence my answer, market cost of pussy has increased (in apparence) because commitment from men is valued at zero due to promiscuity and destruction of marriage.

Note that cost of prostitution has *not* increased (they have gone down slightly according to the Economist magazine), which is consistent with my thesis. Because cost of prostitution has never included any commitment component.

Interesting.

Seems like the simple way of looking at it wold be, resource exchange (incl safety, shelter, etc) has been all but eliminated. Resource exchange is required for creating families, and families encourage resource exchange (building a family). Men offer up more of these tangible resources (think building a house) and less intangible (think commitment and love), women offer up more intangible resources and less tangible resources.

The culture has ruined marriage. There's little consideration for family. Kids belong to the culture and all its intersections. I suspect we've terribly underestimated how difficult a safe, stable society is to maintain, especially in the face of disruptive technology.

Also, I'd disagree with corsega's response that this has been pondered since the inception of the forum. Not that it hasn't, but that smart phones and the ubiquity of social media has changed everything.

This is a technological revolution x 1000, especially with the current level of wealth in the world. Printing press, industrial revolution...they pale compared to what we're seeing right now.

Post: #24

The lengths men go to for pussy on Tinder:

Pensioner, 69, 'who identifies as a 45-year-old' begins legal action to have his age reduced so he can attract more women on Tinder

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article...e-age.html

Post: #25

No guy who self improves, has social skills, and takes care of his appereance/look etc, and most importantly approaches live and in person with confidence will ever think that his SMV has declined. Quite the opposite.

The problem for many guys is that they are only doing Tinder and dating apps, and get no results, because that virtual place is already full of men, and many of them good looking with model quality pics, and women only swipe right on those 1-5%.

Dating apps like tinder will die soon, because for most guys they will see that is a waste if time....Instagram is a total different story, but there you can DM the thots without having to match with them.